Comments (16)

If I read it correctly, the officer's attorney is simply arguing a motion. I really can't believe that Norm Frink, or any presiding judge would allow such a thing. An officer doesn't get an attorney in Grand Jury that reviews a fatal shooting. Why would he/she rate one in a Negligent Wounding, or Assault case?

All this says to me is that his attorney, knows there is a high probabilty her client is toast, is desperate to throw up some chaff.

And he'll roll over for crooked cops just like Schrunk does. No thanks.

Frink should have had this clown indicted the day after the shooting. Instead he drags his feet, so that suddenly the grand jury is an adversary proceeding. So typical. So corrupt. That office needs new blood, not a warm-over.

If the PPB was negligent in training personnel on the use of this less leathal weapon, then why is that only one guy among many officers, and in thousands of incidents, made this particular mistake.

The likely end result that will occur is expensive broad based training for all, when only one guy didn't get it. One guy makes a racial slur, diversity training for all. One guy wrecks a car, driving school for all..... and so on.

Promptly indicting the guy would have been nice. This jncident took place nearly four months ago. The long delays in "investigating" police shootings in Portland are ridiculous. Now they're opening the door for defense lawyers to introduce evidence to the grand jury? That's a rigged deck that no civilian defendant would ever get.

You honestly think a lack of "promptness" caused this problem? What the defense attorney is doing here is entirely out of bounds and unprecedented. Nobody could have predicted this kind of move. Blaming the office THAT IS ACTIVELY OPPOSING THESE EFFORTS seems like over-reaching. Instead, blame the questionable tactics of the defense attorney.

Overjoyed? Do you really think Mult Co would be seeking to introduce evidence of this officer's prior misconduct if they weren't serious about seeking an indictment? As far as the prompt indictment is concerned, have you considered what is may not be reported? What if the the DA's Office was trying to get him to plead pre-grand jury? Could that account for a delay? What if they didn't have all of the necessary reports from the crime lab, etc? Let's not presume you have all of the answers as to why or why not they are doing certain things.

I have decades of history. The Multnomah County d.a.'s office never indicts a cop, even if the cop intentionally, brutally kills somebody and lies through his teeth about it. Nobody seriously thinks that anyone in that office wants to indict a cop who "merely" ruins a guy's life based on a "mere" grossly negligent mistake. Now they can blame "unprecedented" defense lawyer motion yada yada when they come up with another lame no-bill.

I served on a grand jury in another county recently. Most members were cheerleaders for the cops and das. When I dared to question anything they did, one member in particular stared at me as if I were an infidel.

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 80
At this date last year: 89
Total run in 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269